Recent attention to buried chemical weapon materiel has highlighted the need for remediation systems to destroy recovered chemical warfare materiel (CWM) at a substantially faster rate than can be done with systems currently used by the Project Manager for Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel (PM NSCM). The attention has highlighted the fact that the PM NSCM's inventory of mobile remediation systems—the Explosive Destruction System (EDS) and the Rapid Response System (RRS)—were originally designed to address only small volumes of recovered CWM. These systems have worked very well and have achieved a significant degree of acceptance with the public and within the regulatory community. However, the near continuous use of the existing four EDS platforms and the extension of the Chemical Weapon Convention deadlines have shown the throughput of these systems is inadequate to address many of the identified CWM disposal/burial sites.
Devices for safely handling explosives are well known in the art. For example, Fylling, in U.S. Pat. No. 3,820,479, describes a mobile container in which an explosive, such as a time bomb, can be placed after discovery for transport to a suitable location for disarming. In includes a ballistic grille to vent explosion gases in an upwardly direction. Hickerson, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,027,601, describes a container for explosive devices that includes inner and outer cylinders to substantially contain detonation fragments and the blast. This device is intended to transport improvised explosive devices (IEDs) or homemade bombs to a safe disposal area. Benedick et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 4,055,247, describes an explosive storage container designed to absorb and contain the blast, fragments, and detonation products from an unintentional detonation of the contained explosive or munition. Here again, the device is designed to safely transport and store a munition and includes distinct layers to absorb the explosive energy. All of these devices are intended to provide a safe means for transport and/or storage of an explosive, but none are designed for purposeful detonation in order to destroy the explosive, and none are gas-tight or otherwise designed to treat toxic or hazardous chemical payloads.
Holmlund et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 4,478,126 describes a chamber for containing the effects arising from explosions or detonations whether initiated intentionally or unintentionally inside the chamber. The chamber comprises a cylindrically formed mantle with associated sealed ends. Ohlsson, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,478,350, describes a spherical container or chamber to protect the surroundings by containing critical stages in the manufacture of explosives, or to store or serve as a bunker for explosives. Ohlson, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,621,559, describes a readily replaceable liner to be used in detonation chambers and capable of receiving fragments to mitigate the effects of splinters produced by explosions, and in which only damaged parts of the liner need to be replaced; and Ohlson, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,632,041, describes a cylindrical blasting chamber which can contain high pressure and splinters produced by an explosion. The blasting chamber includes a double-wall design such that explosive pressure is distributed fairly evenly between the inner and outer walls. However, these devices are not intended to be used for the safe detonation and chemical treatment of explosively configured chemical warfare munitions.
Donovan, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,613,453, 5,884,569, 6,173,662, and 6,354,181 describes methods and an devices for containing and suppressing explosive detonations, whether for the explosive working of metals or for the disposal of unwanted explosive munitions. The apparatus includes a linear array of vent pipes to vent the explosions' gaseous combustion products for subsequent treatment in a scrubber. This apparatus includes a double-walled steel explosion chamber anchored to a concrete foundation, and double-walled access and vent doors. Energy absorbing means such as water-filled bags and conventional chain blast mats are also employed. This device is not intended to be readily mobile, is not equipped for chemical neutralization, nor is it gas-tight so that it can safely contain toxic chemical warfare agents and byproducts.
Explosive chambers have also been developed for controlling and suppressing the detonation of explosives used for industrial applications such as surface hardening of manganese steel rail, welding of metallic components, and compression molding of components from powders. Most of these applications permit the release of the explosion combustion products into the atmosphere. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,419,862 and 4,100,783 issued to Hampel and Gambarov, respectively. Dribas in U.S. Pat. No. 4,085,883 and Minin in U.S. Pat. No. 4,081,982 disclose spherical containment vessels for explosive working of metals, the latter also including an internal liquid spray for neutralizing toxic byproducts of the explosion. Here again, these devices are intended to explosively work or harden a workpiece, are not intended to access the interior of the workpiece or otherwise destroy it, and are not gas-tight or otherwise suitable for disposal of chemical warfare munitions.
Sandia National Laboratories developed the EDS for PM NSCM in the late 1990s to provide a self-contained, transportable capability to remediate small volumes of non-stockpile chemical munitions at recovery sites. The technology is summarized in U.S. Pat. No. 6,188,338, to Tschritter, et al., herein incorporated by reference in its entirety, as is a list of the constituents known to have been used in CWM weapons as are the commonly known remediation solution media. The EDS has proven to be a flexible, capable, effective, and regulatory acceptable system to meet PM NSCM's mission requirements as these requirements were understood in the late 1990s. The successful operation of the EDS, and a subsequently larger, second generation version of EDS, has proven the core technology, but neither system was designed for high throughput or large quantity operations. Moreover, these systems do not disclose a separate waste treatment system, nor do they disclose an explosive containment vessel comprising two side by side cylindrical cups and a center seal system, nor do they disclose a semi-permanent fragmentation suppression system does the present invention, no is a semi-continuous batch operation anticipated by either. Consequently, neither can meet the emerging needs for expected higher volume processing. However, the current limited process rate is not inherent in the EDS technology. It is entirely feasible to build a much faster system while retaining the proven benefits of the EDS process.
In view of the foregoing, and the enormous need for remediation of obsolete, decaying, and degraded munitions it is highly desirable to provide an apparatus which can be used to dispose of chemical warfare munitions in a safe and rapid industrial basis.